Using emulators for reviews...Good or bad?

[Bill Loguidice]

and that's the beauty of emulation! you don't have to physically own an outdated/unattainable game to enjoy it - I maintain that MAME is amongst the best written pieces of software for the PC, ever.. It's a beautiful thing.

 

If someone doesn't own an Atari and enjoys playing in through emulation, then decides to write entertaining reviews. Who cares? It's the review itself that needs to be enjoyable.. not how, where, and when, they played the game.

 

I don't think anyone is disputing that. Emulation is a wonderful thing. Where the issue comes in if you use the "powers" of emulation to change the experience in any way. And then there's never a guarantee with all other things being equal that the emulated experience will even be authentic. There could be framerate issues, visual/audio glitches, etc., and there may be no way of knowing. The reviewer may think "that's the way it is". You just don't know. The point is, these are not always accurate reviews for various reasons (perhaps the person even used an emulators speed up feature to speed through the loading or slow points of the game, which certainly would rear their ugly head on the real deal).

 

Again, to my mind, as long as the ground rules are laid forth for the review and everything is kept clear, I have no issues with how anyone reviews anything.

[maibock]

and that's the beauty of emulation! you don't have to physically own an outdated/unattainable game to enjoy it - I maintain that MAME is amongst the best written pieces of software for the PC, ever.. It's a beautiful thing.

 

If someone doesn't own an Atari and enjoys playing in through emulation, then decides to write entertaining reviews. Who cares? It's the review itself that needs to be enjoyable.. not how, where, and when, they played the game.

 

I don't think anyone is disputing that. Emulation is a wonderful thing. Where the issue comes in if you use the "powers" of emulation to change the experience in any way. And then there's never a guarantee with all other things being equal that the emulated experience will even be authentic. There could be framerate issues, visual/audio glitches, etc., and there may be no way of knowing. The reviewer may think "that's the way it is". You just don't know. The point is, these are not always accurate reviews for various reasons (perhaps the person even used an emulators speed up feature to speed through the loading or slow points of the game, which certainly would rear their ugly head on the real deal).

 

Again, to my mind, as long as the ground rules are laid forth for the review and everything is kept clear, I have no issues with how anyone reviews anything.

 

That's where a bit of sensibility comes in. I mean who would actually change something through emulation(speed up/auto fire/ etc etc)and then critique the game accordingly. Doesn't make much sense really. And yes obviously it would be nice to be all upfront with everything. My issue is with those who say you shouldn't review a classic game using an emulator.

[Video]

Seriously, I don't think it's that big a deal. Be honest, really. Would you take a review less serious because someone used a vader, or a jr 2600? How about if they used a Wicco stick? Tac2? Sega Genesis pad? How about CRT vs LCD vs LED vs HD vs projector?

 

The fact is, it doesn't really matter one damn bit, because the likelyhood of the er...."experiance" being 100% to start with is virtually zero anyways.

 

Like I said, no real problems, but mention how the game is played for those who think it does matter, let the reader decide if they want to trust your skills as a reviewer. After all, they already do, based on your like or dislike of different genera's such as racers, space shooters, rpgs, fps, etc. Not everybody's going to like football, so if that's your favorite sport, your going to loose some fans on that alone. Don't worry about the "emu vs real hardware" thing because it's not really all that important in the end.

[CGQuarterly]

And then there's never a guarantee with all other things being equal that the emulated experience will even be authentic. There could be framerate issues, visual/audio glitches, etc., and there may be no way of knowing. The reviewer may think "that's the way it is". You just don't know. The point is, these are not always accurate reviews for various reasons (perhaps the person even used an emulators speed up feature to speed through the loading or slow points of the game, which certainly would rear their ugly head on the real deal).

 

Again, to my mind, as long as the ground rules are laid forth for the review and everything is kept clear, I have no issues with how anyone reviews anything.

 

This sums up everything I have been trying to say. If someone wants to be the out-in-the-open emulation-based reviewer dude, I have no issue with that. But playing a game on am emulator does not equal playing the same game on the real hardware. And again, why would you do a HARDWARE REVIEW when you don't HAVE THE HARDWARE.

 

Chris

Edited September 11, 2009 by Jibbajaba

[maibock]

And again, why would you do a HARDWARE REVIEW when you don't HAVE THE HARDWARE.

 

Chris

 

Seems like we're swimming in circles here, but if this is the main crux of what you're talking about, well then that makes sense. I thought the discussion was on reviewing classic games using emulation. Not the hardware, the games

[AtariLeaf]

How's this? This is one I just did for One on One for the XL/XE. Its me playing on actual hardware recorded to an ATI All in Wonder. I did the emulator thing before for convenience but I actually prefer this method.

 

 

Oh and I never review a game I don't actually own.

Edited September 11, 2009 by AtariLeaf

[CGQuarterly]

And again, why would you do a HARDWARE REVIEW when you don't HAVE THE HARDWARE.

 

Chris

 

Seems like we're swimming in circles here, but if this is the main crux of what you're talking about, well then that makes sense. I thought the discussion was on reviewing classic games using emulation. Not the hardware, the games

 

No, like I said, as long as it is made known that emulation is being used, then no problem. In fact, it would be an interesting spin if someone did nothing but emulated reviews and wrote them from that perspective. Then they could talk about what kind of bugs or glitches might pop up with a certain emulator when playing game X, or how game y, which normally isn't that good, is made better by messing with the speed, or game z's graphics are sub-par for the genesis, but look a lot better using certain filters. Also, some games don't run well under one emulator, but run great under another, so that could be discussed. If you are going to use emulation to review games, then embrace it and make it the thing that sets you apart from the pack. But don't use emulation to write a review if you are just going to review the game itself, because thats disingenuous (in my opinion).

 

Chris

[Shannon]

Don't forget that if you do a review on a real machine you need to have an expert come out and make sure your tv and audio system is set-up properly as to properly reproduce the look and sound of the original equipment the console was hooked up with! After all, we didn't have all this hi-def crap back then, like we do today. There is more to playing classic hardware than just the original console!!

[CGQuarterly]

Don't forget that if you do a review on a real machine you need to have an expert come out and make sure your tv and audio system is set-up properly as to properly reproduce the look and sound of the original equipment the console was hooked up with! After all, we didn't have all this hi-def crap back then, like we do today. There is more to playing classic hardware than just the original console!!

 

While your facetiousness is quite obvious, I actually agree that you should use an appropriate display. Old consoles look like crap on HDTVs. I use an RGB monitor and have RGB cables for all of my systems.

 

Chris

[Shannon]